Spider-Man 3 semi-spoiler... pic of a villain

[Zac Shipley]

70s show got fucked when fox tried "That 80s Show" with a different cast, thus removing 70s ability to move past the decade.

[Phil Bond]

"That 80's Show" as a title change for "That 70's Show" would have had the ring of a show that's been on the air too long.

[Dru]

Then changing the name to "That 80's Show" would have been ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE.

[SparkStalker]

I hope they release a wallpaper quality still of this shot:
http://powet.tv/images/3/mirrormirror.jpg

[aDam]

I thought I heard at one point it was 2 years for every 10 in the Marvel Universe. That still doesn't explain some characters...

[Rabban]

When I read comics regularly as a kid, I was told every 3 years for us is 1 year for comic book characters.  The formula seemed to work when I did the math 10 years ago or so.  For example, if I remember correctly, Cyclops was 15 when he became leader of the X-Men.  The comic debuted in 1963.

2006-1963 = 43

43/3 = 14.333

14+15 = 29

[Dru]

Marvel is openly pushing its timeline -

It's been 10 years since the Fantastic Four launched into space and got their powers.

Spider Man, The Avengers, and the X-Men all debuted right around the same time as that, so that should help you out.

It requires a hefty suspension of disbelief, but it kind of works out.

Better than having a Crisis every 20 years.  (And a Zero Hour inbetween.)

[aDam]

Yeah but Shadowcat's aged like 4 years throughout the comic?

[Rabban]

Good Lord, the comic book geek in me is comming out now.  Kitty Pryde was 13 when she made her 1st appearance in Uncanny X-Men #129 that was released in 1979.

2006-1979 = 27

27/3 = 9

9+13 = 21

A couple of years ago, Marvel released a limited series entitled 'Mekanix.'  The series centered around Shadowcat and her life at the University of Chicago.  Now I'm not saying this theory is how they determine characters' ages, but it seems to be pretty close.

[SeanOrange]

Having an ageless cast is kind of a problem.  I think a few of the DC heads have joked that Dick Grayson is now older than Batman.  The new (and kind of shitty) Wolverine: Origins most definitely takes place during Vietnam, which just causes all kind of problems dropping it into a "real" timeline like that.  Lots of titles can have annual Christmas or other holiday specials, yet in order to retain their agless quality these event have to happen several times a year.

It's too bad we can't just let these characters age.  Or at least some of them.

[Dru]

The Wolvine one works, because he's supposed to be a 100 years old or something.  But having someone like Punisher tied to Vietnam is a problem already, and it's only going to get worse.

Seriously, if you're going to believe in ageless characters at Marvel, you'd better buy into their 10 year scale.  They specifically referenced Cap being unfrozen in the 90's in the Captain America series, and in Giant-Sized Hulk, Peter David's story has the characters due to receive recognition from President Clinton.  Hercules says he thought they were getting it from President Carter.  One of the other characters corrects him, saying Carter was decades ago, and Hercules laughs it off, saying that as an immortal, it's easy for time and names to get muddled for him.

Yeah, that could cause problems down the line, but then there'll just be more retconning to be done.  Which means Peter David should probably be employed by Marvel FOREVER.

[SeanOrange]

Heh, then there's Superman Returns, where 5 years have passed, but it's been closer to 25 years since Superman II.  There are none of the same actors, and the anachronisms, such as typewriters (remember, most of the first two movies was filmed in 77/78) are completely gone, replaced by computers and cell phones capable of text messaging.

A lot's changed on Earth in five years, Clark!

But we can overlook that, because much like with comics we kind of have to.  That's why I like where these superhero movies are going now.  Take X-Men or the topically-appropriate Spider-man.  Both are popular franchises that have been very deliberately structured as trilogies.  It's been said that after Spidey 3, Raimi will be done with his arc.

Since humans do age, completely replacing the cast and going for another three is not beyond reason.  Much like Superman Returns or Batman Begins, it'll pay more for the next batch to pick up visual cues, story templates, and common story themes/characterization from its predecessors, but there doesn't have to necessarily be a direct story link from one "trilogy" to the next, which means that the director(s) had better wrap up all of their ideas in three movies before the next three start.

I think that solves a problem for movies.  I kind of wish comics would do something similar.  As neat as it is that there have been over 800 issues of Action Comics, I'd rather have quality over quantity.  Some might find Marvel's habit of renumbering their books every 4-5 years annoying, but they're chances for complete stories to have a beginning, middle, and end, and then start over with something fresh.  And if you don't like volume 3?  Better luck with volume 4.

That'd be the ideal, anyway.

[aDam]

Oh. I thought kitty was still like 16.

[Rabban]

The only issue I've ever had with comic book characters and dropping them into a "real" timeline is with Image comics during the mid '90s.  Instead of having some of their more popular characters just associated with the conflict in Vietnam, they chose to go back even further in time and have some of them as participants in WWII.  Let's say these people were in their 20's during WWII.  Jump forward to 1995, these characters are now in their 70's.  50 years go by, and they still look the same.  I don't know why, but that always seemed to annoy me for some reason.  And just so that we're all clear, I'm not including the Kherubim (the nearly immortal, human-looking alien race introduced by Jim Lee) or any other long lifed races in this rant either.

[Zac Shipley]

The "No-Prize" goes to whoever can determine the age of James Bond.